In the days following the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University on September 10, 2025, Indiana has become a flashpoint in the national debate over free speech, political violence, and the rights of public employees. The aftermath has seen a wave of firings, heated statements from top officials, and growing concern among free speech advocates about the chilling effect on educators and other public workers.
Ball State University was among the first to take action. Suzanna Swierc, the school’s director of health promotion and advocacy, was dismissed after posting on her personal Facebook page that Kirk’s death was “a reflection of the violence, fear and hatred he sowed.” The university said her comments did “not reflect the culture of our campus nor the enduring values of the university.” According to reporting by FOX59/CBS4, a second Ball State employee was investigated for a post that Kirk’s killing “feels like karma paid a visit.”
The Indiana Department of Child Services also terminated an employee who referenced Kirk’s fatal gunshot wound by writing, “today was a real pain in the neck.” Lieutenant Governor Micah Beckwith praised the department’s decision, stating that “they took bold, immediate action and did what was right.”
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has been an especially vocal supporter of these moves. He applauded Swierc’s firing, calling it “one of the first submissions posted to our portal. BSU made the right decision in firing her. Hope her vile comments were worth it.” Rokita has encouraged Hoosiers to report objectionable content by educators to his “Eyes on Education” portal, originally created in early 2024 to crowdsource examples of problematic curricula, but now increasingly focused on tracking individual educators’ social media behavior.
The crackdown has not been limited to firings. On September 17, Governor Mike Braun issued a stark warning to Indiana’s teachers and public employees: making statements online that celebrate or incite political violence could cost them their professional licenses. “In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, there have been some terrible things shared, particularly across social media,” Braun said in a statement. “While we must protect the First Amendment, calls for political violence are not freedom of speech and should not be tolerated.”
Braun emphasized that Indiana Secretary of Education Katie Jenner has the authority to suspend or revoke K-12 teachers’ licenses for misconduct, immorality, incompetency, or willful neglect of duty. Jenner’s office, he noted, would be reviewing reported statements from teachers and administrators. “The Secretary of Education has the authority to suspend or revoke a license for misconduct, and the office will review reported statements of K-12 teachers and administrators who have made statements to celebrate or incite political violence,” Braun reiterated, as reported by WFYI.
The governor’s warning comes amid a broader national effort by conservative activists to identify and report individuals who posted critical or celebratory comments about Kirk’s death. Screenshots of social media posts from educators at eight Indiana schools have already appeared on Rokita’s portal. Beckwith, the lieutenant governor, has invited the public to email reports of any educator or state employee; he pledged to review submissions and, where appropriate, forward them to management for potential discipline.
Not everyone is on board with this approach. Free speech advocates and educators’ organizations have voiced strong concerns about the potential for overreach and the risk of silencing lawful, constitutionally protected speech. Josh Bleisch, an attorney with the ACLU of Indiana, told WFYI, “People don’t lose their First Amendment rights just because they take a job with a public employer. You still have a right to comment on matters of public concern as a citizen.”
The Indiana State Teachers Association (ISTA) echoed this sentiment in a statement: “While celebrating political violence is unacceptable, threatening educators’ licenses for lawful speech risks silencing those who are teaching honestly or sharing personal views responsibly. In this moment, our focus should be on keeping students safe and supporting classrooms and communities. Political violence threatens our democracy, but so does censorship.”
Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, called for rejecting the “vitriol that is making schools and communities less safe and poisoning our public discourse.” The Indiana Coalition for Public Education went further, warning that the governor’s words “will exacerbate this situation, creating even more stress for the children and teachers in the classroom,” and comparing the current climate to the “Red Scare” of the 1950s. “Such efforts undermine the trust that parents and communities have placed in our teachers and schools.”
Legal experts caution that the bar for disciplining public employees over speech is high. IU Maurer Law School Professor Steve Sanders explained to FOX59/CBS4 that “if a government employee speaks on a matter of public concern, and the Charlie Kirk assassination clearly is that, then their employer must show that that speech has a disruptive or burdensome impact on their workplace.” Sanders emphasized that it is not enough for coworkers to be upset; the employer must demonstrate real and significant disruption. “Unless you have a contract that says otherwise and unless you have some sort of tenure guarantee that says you can only be fired for specific causes, yes, your boss can fire you because of your political expression, because he doesn’t like the color of your eyes, or anything else,” Sanders said. “I think it’s important for people to understand that when they exercise their free speech rights, they may be taking a risk with their job.”
David Keating, president of the Institute for Free Speech, raised constitutional concerns about suspending or revoking licenses for speech not tied to criminal acts or serious misconduct. “You are allowed to call for violent overthrow of the government. You’re allowed to even call for assassinations. Obviously, this is not the sort of thing that you want an elementary school teacher to have in their background. But I don’t think it meets the standards for a license revocation,” Keating said, as reported by the Indiana Capital Chronicle.
Indiana law gives the Department of Education authority to suspend or revoke a teacher’s license for “immorality,” “misconduct in office,” “incompetency,” or “willful neglect of duty.” However, “immorality” is not defined in state code, leaving its application to off-duty speech—especially on personal social media—open to interpretation. According to the Indiana Capital Chronicle, most license revocations are tied to criminal convictions, with only a handful for “immorality” or “misconduct.”
Stevie Pactor, an attorney with the ACLU of Indiana, emphasized that “teachers still have First Amendment rights when they’re talking as private citizens about matters of public concern on their social media or anywhere else.” She warned that the threat of licensure action could chill lawful speech, noting, “If I were a K-12 educator, I would absolutely be very, very cognizant of what I was putting on social media in this climate, and to a degree that’s not really justified by what the law allows.”
As the debate continues, the Indiana Department of Education has stated that it is reviewing each reported case but does not comment on open investigations. With more than 230,000 licensed teachers in the state, the stakes are high—not just for those directly affected, but for the broader principles of free expression and the boundaries of professional conduct in public service. For now, Indiana’s educators and public employees are left to navigate an uncertain landscape, balancing their rights as citizens with the risks posed by a rapidly shifting political and legal environment.
